|
|
|
|
|
| HOME | NEWS | DEAR REDIFF | |||
|
COLUMNISTS
|
|
|
'Pakistan can change only if its people wake up to the depths of depravity their leaders can plunge them into'
E-mail from readers the world over
Date:
Fri, 09 Jul 1999 11:42:48 PDT The India Post media group is planning a cricket tournament in North America across three cities. The details and schedules are posted at http://www.postmediagroup.com. What gets my goat is that Kapil Dev along with Ajay Jadeja visit Kashmir and the Sahara Cup is cancelled. A few thousand Indians here in the San Francisco Bay Area carry out a protest march on the Golden Gate Bridge against Pakistani atrocities. Indians in the United States have given around $ 30,000 towards the Army Welfare Fund though Varsha Bhosle rightly feels it is inadequate. Now, do the organisers of the tournament expect the same Indians to come out in support of a team which has both Indians and Pakistanis? In the first place, how did seven members of the Indian team agree to this at all? How did Ajay Jadeja agree to participate? I have written to the organisers but there has been no response. If I have heard right tickets are already on sale. You need to raise awareness in the press back home about this tourney and make it too hot for the players to leave home for the competition. Thanks and regards, Sriram Jeyaraman
Date:
Fri, 9 Jul 1999 08:31:43 -0700 (PDT) Anil Nair has made a nice suggestion. Let there be a meeting between Vajpayee, Sharief and Clinton. War should not take place. Violence is to be shunned. Human lives are more important than land. The proposed conference in Washington DC must be strictly according to Gandhian principles. After all both Pakistanis and Indians, so to speak, are children of Bapuji. In fact if Gandhian principles are followed, this meeting need not take place in Washington but can be in held in Lahore itself. Let us remember Bapuji. The solution to the Kargil problem can be found by following his teachings. Peace is necessary. Let anybody possess the land. Naqvi
Date:
Wed, 7 Jul 1999 23:25:24 +0530 As usual Kanchan Gupta has been pretty forthright in his views. But I feel it would be better for him to avoid terms like ''Islamic barbarism" and "Hindu civilisation." Does the BJP want to convey the wrong impression once again? We are a secular nation: let's not forget that at all. I don't think there is any doubt about the patriotism of our Muslim brethren and it would be the moral duty of every citizen not to hurt their sentiments or of any other section. I wish people writing these columns would be more careful and understand their responsibilities. Let's not behave like the Pakistani public and journalists do. We do not need harsh words but only the bare truth. Harish Ganesh
Date:
Tue, 6 Jul 1999 21:47:41 -0400 I have only one bone to pick with Kanchan Gupta. You state that Nawaz Sharief's continued presence is preferable to the possibility of the army or Islamists usurping power in Pakistan. I am not certain that it is a well thought-out view. The continued support of the devil because of the fear of the deep prejudges other possible outcomes. Past examples abound. Support of Gorbachev for fear of Yeltsin was similarly misplaced at a time when Gorbachev was seen as a 'stabilising' factor and Yeltsin as a rabid radical. I know that our support for Bhutto after the Simla agreement was with the view of keeping him in power and stall the army in Pakistan from coming to power. Pakistan is hiding behind a fig leaf. It has been shown up to be a fractured and corrupt state. Keeping Sharief in power will allow Pakistan to emerge unscathed despite its innumerable transgressions. A casual glance at the history books in Pakistani schools reveals how much can be distorted and denied. We need to let events take their course. Let the army or Islamists come to power through a coup in Pakistan. They will radicalise their nation further causing it to fall even more deeply into disrepute. The only way Pakistan can unwind from the mess it is in is by a gradual re-education of its people. India's demeanour in this crisis is not an accident. It reflects our values and principles. Pakistan can change, but only if the people of Pakistan wake up to the depths of depravity that their leaders can plunge them into. It will be up to them to choose their leaders and choose the type of nation they want to be. It will take a generation for meaningful change to happen. A Christian needs his 'hell' and a Muslim his jahannum to remain on the straight and narrow.
S Ramakrishnan
Date:
Tue, 06 Jul 1999 20:11:30 -0400 Dear Mr Gupta, You make a good point but in foul language. Before calling Islam names -- ''barbaric" etc -- please remember that India has more Muslims than Pakistan, some of whom are fighting in the very army which you claim will not shoot people in the back. The begging bowl you charge Pakistani with holding is also in India's hand as was evident in the numerous rounds of talks Jaswant Singh held with United States's officials. Let us not throw pennies and dimes at Pakistan when we carry the same bowl. Any self-respecting Indian would be hurt at the characterisation of aid from the US as begging. The import of your essay would not have been lost if you were as polite and magnanimous towards the Pakistanis as you recommend our soldiers to be. Neeraj
Date:
Wed, 07 Jul 1999 10:46:01 -0600 There is a tendency among the so-called moderates and peaceniks in Pakistan and India -- the likes of Iqbal Khan and Kuldip Nayar -- to equate the two countries in terms of atrocities committed. There is no way you can equate a theocracy based on a hatred of kafirs with a secular democracy. I seek peace, but let's call a spade a spade. Let Pakistan erase the term kafir from its vocabulary. Let Pakistan move forward into the twenty first century and become a secular democracy. Then, and only then, can there be lasting peace. Unfortunately, there isn't much hope that this will happen. If Pakistan becomes secular then it loses its reason for being. And if Pakistan erases the term kafir then it loses its claim on Kashmir by admitting that Muslims can live in any country, even in a secular one. I hereby call for a new precondition before talks with Pakistan can be resumed. Demand that Pakistan become a secular democracy and stop persecuting people of other religions. India can justifiably claim that it is impossible for communication to occur between the 21st and 13th centuries (Pakistan's place in chronology), since this defies all known laws of the universe.
Date:
Thu, 6 Jan 2000 15:31:53 +1100 (EST) Very interesting. However, what Kuldip Nayar omitted is also interesting: which is that deep hostilities between countries cannot be removed by travelling in buses and reciting poems! It is really foolish to think that Vajpayee's so-called bus diplomacy had even a ghost of a chance. It has all happened before! We were euphoric over Hindi Chini bhai bhai and were thrashed soon after! It is really stupid of us to think that we can prevent Pakistan from drawing international attention to the dispute. It is also foolish of us to be afraid of international attention. We should take the offensive with regard to international opinion. Our stand should be clear. We are a secular country. And we cannot allow part of our country to be surrendered just on the basis of religion.
Jay Kochhar
Date:
Fri, 09 Jul 1999 20:04:12 +0500 Dear Mr Johnson, Thank you for your message. I do respond personally to e-mails. Surely, if as you yourself suggest, there is so much oppression in India, there is something wrong with the Indian state, from burning Christian missionaries to deploying rape as a weapon of war in Kashmir. The second time it is being done, apart from Bosnia and Kosovo. We are for peace but it takes two to tango. Regards,
Mushahid Hussain This letter from the Pakistan information minister is in response to Mark Johnson's letter carried in Dear Rediff. Readers can read that mail here
Date:
Fri, 9 Jul 1999 08:22:20 -0700 I sincerely doubt the statement that 100 Stinger missiles were fired by rebels at IAF planes. I don't think there were so many of these missiles floating around in the first place or else the US would have taken some definite steps to confiscate them or at least prevent their use. Nikhil T
Date:
Thu, 08 Jul 1999 22:43:56 -0800 The purpose of the article was not at all clear. Is Nadkarni suggesting an information blackout on Kargil? Sounds very elitist. It's time politicians, bureaucrats, and present and retired armywallahs realised that India is a democracy and that they have to account for whatever they do to their masters the people. If the retired admiral can produce informative articles let him do so, but let him avoid pontification. As it is there is nothing wrong with armchair generals but they shouldn't take it for granted that the rest of the populace is beholden to listen to them. It is a reflection of the intelligence of such people that they are often so unaware of how ridiculous they sound.
Date:
Sat, 10 Jul 1999 12:32:13 +0800 Though it is too late to comment on this in view of recent developments it is indeed commendable that India took a step in the right direction by putting a hardliner like Advani in charge of the Jammu sector. The home minister is a man of foresight and with a no-nonsense approach to the Kashmir issue. I admire the way in which the BJP has gone about addressing this long-standing problem of Kashmir, which is, and always will be, an integral part of India. Thanks for this very informative and enlightening article. I request rediff.com to kindly provide links to similar articles on Kashmir. Keep up the good work.
Date:
Wed, 30 Jun 1999 13:56:43 -0400 There are times when I have questioned the need for a free press. Is the information in this article, for instance, going to be of any help to anyone? Because somebody was willing to talk, you just published it? This is war-time. I think a responsible Internet news agency like yours has to know better on what to publish and what not to. Sensationalism is not journalism. This is India not Pakistan -- we can only request and not terrorise or torture you. Please don't publish anything that would bring down the morale of the soldiers or the supporting common man. Kindly remove this article from your web site. Narasimhan
Date:
Thursday, July 08, 1999 6:54 AM I don't get this: what happened between Clinton and Sharief on July 4 was essentially a kind of "behave yourself or else...." kind of warning from the former to the latter. Then, why do we need to call it an "accord"? As such we have enough number of accords, declarations, resolutions and what not, to "respect.'' Look at the way, the Siachen issue is being twisted by Pakistan based on this "accord." Ravi
Date:
Thursday, July 08, 1999 2:11 PM Based on what many independent news sources say it is clear that most insurgents in Kargil are regulars of the Pakistani army. Whether the whole operation was known to Nawaz Sharief beforehand or not, he now has the full confidence and understanding of the army. This is clear from the Pakistan army chief's recent statements. So, all these noises by various fundamentalist organisations about their not backing out from Kargil could be just orchestration by Nawaz Sharief and his army to make the world believe how difficult it is for Sharief to keep his word to Clinton. By this, Pakistan hopes that the government will get a lot of sympathy from the West, and Sharief and his regime will end up looking the good guys (in relative terms of course). We should not take what the various fundamentalist groups are saying at face value.
Chitta Baral
|
||
|
HOME |
NEWS |
BUSINESS |
SPORTS |
MOVIES |
CHAT |
INFOTECH |
TRAVEL |
SINGLES BOOK SHOP | MUSIC SHOP | GIFT SHOP | HOTEL RESERVATIONS | WORLD CUP 99 EDUCATION | PERSONAL HOMEPAGES | FREE EMAIL | FEEDBACK |
||